[Misc] Christians seem to be really good people

[Triggaaar]

What would be enough for you to accept something as fact?
If something is almost universally accepted as true by experts, that's not enough for you?

You have completely misinterpreted what the scholars are saying.

Firslty, I will point out that these people are not experts in history or fact finding, they are people who wanted to spend their time studying the bible and events around the time of Jesus. Most people doing that are Christians and are biased regarding the results the find. It is the completely the wrong way to find the truth.

But regardless: the people you are relying on, are not saying that it is a fact that the disciiples believed in the resurrection, they are saying that with the limited information they have, that their best guess as to what happened, is that most (not all) of the disciples believed that he came back to life. Even they know it's not a fact.

In football terms, this is what you're doing:
If we ask leading football experts who they think is most likely to win the Premier League next season, those experts will agree that it's Man City.
You are then taking that best guess and saying that it's a fact that Man City will win the league next year.

Obviously I know you'll read that and immediately say no without thinking, but that is what you're doing. Your 'experts' are not experts in finding the truth, and they have not concluded that it is a fact that the disciples believed in the resurrection.

You actually have no interest in facts or finding the truth - you believe in god and you want to find anything you can that gives any credibility to your beliefs. As soon as you learn that something isn't a fact and no one will believe you, you will move onto something else that might help you persuade people.

All I'm interested in is the truth. If Jesus really was the son of god, that would be amazing, as I explained earlier in this thread. But every single fact under the sun (and all those the other side of the sun) prove that the bible is a load of made up fiction.

 

[Triggaaar]

I have talked about Thomas a number of times in this thread. 5 times, apparently. Here are a couple:

I broadly agree with what you say here. Regarding the disciples dying as martyrs, I don't know for sure about all of them, but I'm pretty sure Peter and Andrew did. Paul, although not one of the original twelve, was probably martyred in Rome. Thomas is said to have been killed in the south of India (Christianity has been there for well over a thousand years, said to have been brought there by him in the first century). And of course there were many others, too, such as Polycarp, who was a close friend of the apostle John, who were killed for their insistence that Jesus had risen from the dead. Like you say, these people obviously took their claims seriously if they were prepared to die for them. A clear case of putting your money where your mouth is.

No, I've asked about Thomas not believing that Jesus was reurrected. You've not mentioned that at all in your post there about Thomas.

 

[Triggaaar]

I don't really care about the outcome of the argument, but I do care about intellectual honesty. Theology is not history and it is not science.

There is some overlap, though, especially when it comes to Christianity, which is founded on an historical event, ie. the crucifixion and purported resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth.

It's quite incredible that you're triyng to pass this off as history and science.

Jesus probably lived and was probably crucified. But a lot of people lived and the Romans crucified tens of thousands of them, so that's completely irrelevant. The only relevant point is whether or not he rose again, and there is no history or science to suggest that he did.

 

[birthofanorange]

It's quite incredible that you're triyng to pass this off as history and science.

It was incredible after the first few times, now, it's just tedious and rather odd/disturbing.

 

[kuzushi]

You can say what you like, but I asked you a question some pages back that you chose not to answer. Fine, that's your choice. - In the same way that it's @wellquickwoody 's choice not to care about things that you care about.

What was the question?

 

[kuzushi]

Why do you need to ask me that question, why don’t you just state I’ve got that wrong and you don’t believe that.

Because I don't remember saying it. I remember saying something about babies, how God can reach them and they can respond to him, the same way that God is reaching Muslims in the Islamic world. That's all I remember saying about what happens with children regarding judgement. I think we need to trust that God will do the right thing when he judges the world.

 

[kuzushi]

No, I've asked about Thomas not believing that Jesus was reurrected. You've not mentioned that at all in your post there about Thomas.

Thomas wasn't there the first time when Jesus appeared to the other 10, and when they told him about it he didn't believe them. However, he did see Jesus on another occasion, and obviously did believe then since it appears that he went on to go to India, taking the gospel to that land.

Saint Thomas Christians - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[kuzushi]

I'm confused. Did you mean to quote my post with just the word 'What' added, or was that posted in error?

Was it this question? I've answered this one.

 

[kuzushi]

Your a patronising religious zealot, I can not longer converse with you.

If you found anything patronising in what I said, I didn't mean it to come across that way.

 

[Triggaaar]

Thomas wasn't there the first time when Jesus appeared to the other 10, and when they told him about it he didn't believe them. However, he did see Jesus on another occasion, and obviously did believe then since it appears that he went on to go to India, taking the gospel to that land.

Saint Thomas Christians - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

No, going on to preach the gospel just meant that he wanted to continue the teachings of Jesus, it doesn't mean he believed in the resurrection.

 

[birthofanorange]

I think we need to trust that God will do the right thing when he judges the world.


View attachment 162519

That's not true, though, is it? YOU need to trust him/her/it....a huge amount don't, so pack it in.

 

[kuzushi]

No, going on to preach the gospel just meant that he wanted to continue the teachings of Jesus, it doesn't mean he believed in the resurrection.

I don't know as much about this aspect of the history of Christianity as I would like to, but the St Thomas Christians believe in the resurrection.
I know one from work, from Kerala.

 

[Triggaaar]

I don't know as much about this aspect of the history of Christianity as I would like to, but the St Thomas Christians believe in the resurrection.
I know one from work, from Kerala.

It doesn't matter what they belive. The point is that Thomas, the disciple, did not. He's called Doubting Thomas for a reason.

He might have been persuaded to change his mind, as is the way with Christians.

 

[Triggaaar]

Because I don't remember saying it. I remember saying something about babies, how God can reach them and they can respond to him, the same way that God is reaching Muslims in the Islamic world.

God does no reach Muslims in the Islamic world - Christians persuade some Muslims to switch faith, and Muslims persuade some Christians to switch. God himself does not make direct contact with any of them.

 

[Psychobilly freakout]

If you found anything patronising in what I said, I didn't mean it to come across that way.

Like I care.

Othin viki.

get your head round why the Jewish faith thinks your Jewish Jebus was a false prophet.

Why Don't Jews Believe In Jesus | The difference between Judaism and Christianity

Why don't Jews believe in Jesus? Jews For Jesus?

www.simpletoremember.com

footnote, you do know where my footnote is from don’t you ?

 

[Baldseagull]

Thomas wasn't there the first time when Jesus appeared to the other 10, and when they told him about it he didn't believe them. However, he did see Jesus on another occasion, and obviously did believe then since it appears that he went on to go to India, taking the gospel to that land.

Saint Thomas Christians - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So according to "John", he had to see it with his own eyes, he would not take the word of 10 others he knew well, and were there, but you are certain, without knowing who really wrote the Gospels.

 

[kuzushi]

It doesn't matter what they belive. The point is that Thomas, the disciple, did not. He's called Doubting Thomas for a reason.

He might have been persuaded to change his mind, as is the way with Christians.

This is the passage where he gets the soubriquet "doubting"

19 On the evening of that first day of the week, when the disciples were together, with the doors locked for fear of the Jewish leaders, Jesus came and stood among them and said, ‘Peace be with you!’ 20 After he said this, he showed them his hands and side. The disciples were overjoyed when they saw the Lord.

21 Again Jesus said, ‘Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.’ 22 And with that he breathed on them and said, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.’

Jesus appears to Thomas​

24 Now Thomas (also known as Didymus[a]), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples told him, ‘We have seen the Lord!’

But he said to them, ‘Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.’

26 A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, ‘Peace be with you!’ 27 Then he said to Thomas, ‘Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.’

28 Thomas said to him, ‘My Lord and my God!’

29 Then Jesus told him, ‘Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.’

 

[Triggaaar]

This is the passage where he gets the soubriquet "doubting"

19 On the evening of that first day of the week, when the disciples were together, with the doors locked for fear of the Jewish leaders, Jesus came and stood among them and said, ‘Peace be with you!’ 20 After he said this, he showed them his hands and side. The disciples were overjoyed when they saw the Lord.

21 Again Jesus said, ‘Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.’ 22 And with that he breathed on them and said, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.’

Jesus appears to Thomas​

24 Now Thomas (also known as Didymus[a]), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples told him, ‘We have seen the Lord!’

But he said to them, ‘Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.’

26 A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, ‘Peace be with you!’ 27 Then he said to Thomas, ‘Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.’

28 Thomas said to him, ‘My Lord and my God!’

29 Then Jesus told him, ‘Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.’

You know that Jesus didn't have holes in his hands, right?

I also note that the scholar you keep referencing, must believe that these testemonies are false. He thinks the most likely answer is that the disciples had a group hallucination, but what you've just posted would mean they needed to have repeated group hallucinations.

 

[Jolly Red Giant]

Good question.
As yet we don't know whether or not there is life on other planets.
God is creative and he made everything so it wouldn't surprise me if he had dabbled in a bit of creating elsewhere in the universe. Perhaps he may have done a few things that wouldn't have worked here, such as creatures that would be lethal to everyone, or that breathed some different kind of gas or something.
There are all sorts of theories. I've heard all sorts of things. Some say that the Nephilim came from somewhere else. There are also those that say that aliens are in fact demons. Personally, I tend to stay in the territory of what I can be reasonably sure about, such as the death of Jesus and the fact that his disciples believed that he rose from the dead, as borne out by the fact that his followers founded the church, wrote the New Testament, and spread the gospel even in the face of intense persecution.

I am rather loathe to get involved in this thread - but this post caught my eye.

The idea that God might have dabbled in creating life elsewhere in the Universe but 'he may have done a few things that wouldn't have worked here, such as creatures that would be lethal to everyone, or that breathed some different kind of gas or something' - kinda goes against the whole God is all knowing and all seeing and can do no wrong idea promoted by devout Christians. Surely if he wanted to dabble with creating life on another planet he would be capable of ensuring that said life would survive, grow and flourish - he is after all a supreme being.

But - lets look at this a little further - let's look at some of his so-called dabbling on this planet - where he created a parasitic worm called Onchocerca volvulus which burrows into the eyes of children causing intolerable itching, and in the most serious cases permanent blindness, to tens of thousands every year. What kind of a 'loving' God would create such a parasitic organism that would cause so much pain to children ?

We hear the mantra 'God works in mysterious ways' - which really is code for 'if this being really exists he must be a psycopath' for inflicting such pain on children without any remorse.

A few comments on Jesus -

Did he exist - possibly - most biblical scholars believe that a historical figure who could be characterised as Jesus probably existed, or at the very least, is an amalgam of a number of religious characters from Palestine (a society barely out of the Bronze Age at the time). It is likely that Jesus led a breakaway sect from a religious movement led by John the Baptist - and that the religious sect that he founded was an apocalyptic sect who believed in the end of the world within their lifetimes. The New Testament, at best, was written at least 100 years after the death of Jesus (who may or may not have been crucified - it was a common form of execution in Roman controlled Palestine). Furthermore - the New Testament is not a single book - it is a varied collection of different writings by different authors who may or may not have been writing to support a specific political or religious agenda at the time.

The Bible itself is a highly selective collection of writings that has been edited over time to fit with particular political demands. Ultimately four out of dozens of written gospels were selected in the early Christian church for political reasons during the various schisms that occurred within Christianity at the time (it should also be noted that Paul is the actual founder of the Christian religion - not Jesus). Indeed the Bible of most Christian faiths today, the King James Bible is a highly selective document, riddled with errors of translation of the original texts and was developed, again for political reasons, at the time of the Reformation as the monarchies of Europe were attempting to secure their dominance over the Church in Rome, which was the most powerful political entity in the medieval world of the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries.

And - yes - Christians were persecuted before Christianity became the dominant religion in Europe - however, Christian sects were also a dab hand at persecuting others when they were in positions of influence - it was a two way street. Once Christianity became the established religion in the Roman Empire, the Christian Church drove pogrom after pogrom against 'non-believers'.

The problem with those who have 'faith' in a deity is that they then believe that they know what this deity is telling them is the 'truth' and they attempt to impose it on everyone in society. For example - in 1973 (with the assistance of the Americans) Augusto Pinochet organised a military coup in Chile overthrowing a democratically elected government of Salvador Allende, murdered tens of thousands of Chileans and brutalised the country for nearly 20 years. Pinochet said he was 'saving Chile for God' - what he was really doing was protecting the power and wealth of the Chilean elites from a left-wing government. This is just one example of dictators using religion as the backbone of their despotic regimes.

I have no problem with anyone who wants to believe in a deity and wants to practice a religion - indeed I will defend with all my might the right of an individual to practice their religion.

I do have a problem when those who profess a belief in a deity and interpret the 'truth' from such a deity, attempt to impose their beliefs on the rest of society. Then I will do my utmost to oppose this attempt to control society as a whole and the people who live in that society. We have a resurgence of the far-right around the world over the past 15 years or so. What is a political reaction to efforts to liberalise society (and not to liberalise it to any radical degree) is couched in religious rhetoric. It is an attempt to drive society back to a dominant white, patriarchal, (and misogynist) society where anyone who deviates from this perceived norm is demonised. From the Trumpers in America, to the supporters of Bolsonaro in Brazil, to the far-right in Ireland, Poland and Hungary - their attempts to attack the LGBTQ+ community, to whip up xenophobia and racism, and ultimately to protect the interests of capitalism, is played out through a veneer of religious fundamentalism - old-fashioned Catholic social doctrine from the 1930s in places like Ireland, Spain, Portugal, Poland and Brazil - and the vestiges seventeenth century puritanism in places like America, Hungary, Germany and other countries (and Islamic fundamentalism in places like Afghanistan, Syria and the countries of Northern Africa). Religious dogmatism has even gone so far as to equate criticism of the Zionist policies of the Israeli state with anti-Semitism.

So - by all means - believe what you want to believe - practice whatever religious beliefs you want to practice - but keep them out of the public sphere and don't attempt to impose your beliefs on others in your society.

 

[Jolly Red Giant]

You know that Jesus didn't have holes in his hands, right?

And neither did any of those who claimed to have stigmata